The problem I have with any "My Side of the Story" twist on Maleficent is that she is not a "human" character (like, say, Lady Tremaine or Captain Hook) -- where her antagonistic behavior might be worth exploring from an alternate point-of-view and emotional origin.

But Maleficent, rather than human, is an "evil fairy", an elemental representational creature of black magic and dark symbolism - - the self-professed "Mistress of All Evil" - - her existence is simply to create chaos. To rationalize or humanize that is to destroy the character and concept for the mere sake of politically correct deconstruction.

The value she posesses as a storytelling symbol/archetype (the embodiment of our greatest fears to be conquered) would be destroyed.

The problem I have with any "My Side of the Story" twist on Maleficent is that she is not a "human" character (like, say, Lady Tremaine or Captain Hook) -- where her antagonistic behavior might be worth exploring from an alternate point-of-view and emotional origin.

But Maleficent, rather than human, is an "evil fairy", an elemental representational creature of black magic and dark symbolism - - the self-professed "Mistress of All Evil" - - her existence is simply to create chaos. To rationalize or humanize that is to destroy the character and concept for the mere sake of politically correct deconstruction.

The value she posesses as a storytelling symbol/archetype (the embodiment of our greatest fears to be conquered) would be destroyed.

Someone hasn't read Wicked: The Life and Times of the Wicked Witch of the West. That novel totally humanized Elphaba (aka the Wicked Witch of the West) and we see everything from her point of view, from birth to death. Not only providing a lot of back story, it also shows how she came in contact with Dorothy and why she wanted the ruby slippers (not out of spite, mind you). I think a telling of Maleficient's story would be a great opportunity to showcase how/why she became evil. Now, I don't know if Tim Burton is the perfect person to direct the film, but the idea within itself is great. Just as long as they don't follow Wicked, it could turn out to be a rather good film.

>>Someone hasn't read Wicked: The Life and Times of the Wicked Witch of the West.<<

Actually, I did read the novel and attended the musical as well. I was very much intrigued by the set-up of a rivalry between Elphaba and Glinda and how their personal interests conflicted, but I feel the second half of that story disintegrates as it tries to dovetail into "The Wizard of Oz" clumsily with sympathetic political correctness for the Witch's actions (mischaracterized by political rivals).

More interesting would have been if Elphaba, driven by her experience demons then begins to make poor choices/decisions that shape the villain (more like Anakin Skywalker or Lex Luthor on "Smallville", which explain motivation but don't deny that the evil deeds came to be).

Though audiences respond favorably to "Wicked" in that they are super-familiar with the characters in advance - - I do feel that in that instance too, their more powerful roles as archetypes of good and evil in the Baum books and MGM film are compromised by the deconstruction in the new work (moreso when it is made into the inevitable major motion picture).

Having even less pre-existing plot to work with, Maleficent can never be more than a tired attempt to duplicate Wicked's success and beat the same contemporary thematic drum.

That said, an elemental creature/fairy/demon is not the same thing as a human witch.

One thing–my favorite part about Wicked, the novel, is how we never see inside Elphaba's head and yet still come to sympathize and understand her; we are always reading about the way she weaves in and out of other people's stories, from their perspectives. I know what you mean when you say her point of view, but strictly speaking, we almost never see her from her perspective (save the opening scene and, perhaps, the very end–but, as River Song would say, spoilers!). The musical also cleans up the novel considerably; Elphaba is tasked, for political purposes, to murder someone at one point.

And telling the backstory of a character who doesn't have much of one doesn't mean slavishingly following the success of Wicked–although this project certainly smells of it. It's been done countless times–Wide Sargasso Sea, Nothing Like the Sun, Grendel… just to scratch the surface with a little finger. While I certainly agree applying that idea to a beloved classic feels quite a lot like Wicked, I think, if done well, the idea can rise above it and become timeless, like the classic "retellings" (which is the publishing industry's word for "fanfiction") I've just listed. It's not doomed from the start.

Elphaba was someone who tried to murder someone because they were in a powerful position and doing bad to the world. She was meant to blur the lines of what is good and what is evil. The musical makes her appear too innocent. And The Wicked Witch of the West is not the same as Maleficent.

Maleficent calles herself the Mistress of All Evil and uses the powers of Hell to try and kill someone who just got in her way of making complete misery for people, not to mention try to kill a baby just for not being invited.

Yes, she's an evil fairy who has horns on her head. Horns.

Why do we have to show "how" every single person "became" evil? You don't think any one decides to purposely be evil? Well, some people just might.

The only thing I could accept would be for Maleficent to perhaps have been a good fairy like the three good fairies, and after something that makes her mad, instead of just making some bad mistake in anger, she really, truly decides to become evil and join the forces of Hell.

Some Disney book said she may even have been good at one point and been in King Stephen's court. I wish I knew if that was true.

But Maleficent, rather than human, is an "evil fairy", an elemental representational creature of black magic and dark symbolism - - the self-professed "Mistress of All Evil" - - her existence is simply to create chaos. To rationalize or humanize that is to destroy the character and concept for the mere sake of politically correct deconstruction.

The value she posesses as a storytelling symbol/archetype (the embodiment of our greatest fears to be conquered) would be destroyed.

Completely agree. I think this is the reason most people see her as one of Disney's greatest villains, if not the greatest (and I'm sure that's what most of the public would think). To some extent, all Disney's villains are a bit of evil personified, but I think that it could likely be best said for Maleficent. Ursula, Cruella, the Queen, etc. are all fairly human. Even if they're a little exaggerated, they're given motives, and pretty human one's. Maleficent isn't really given a motive, other than to be evil really; I always had the impression she was actually supposed to be more of a demon than a person (until this forum made me question whether she has horns or just a horned headdress). She's more of what the old idea of a fairy would be than Flora, Fauna, and Merriweather.

Like you said about the current "My Side" stories, they always try to make the characters better. Why can't they just make someone who goes bad? Those kinds of people do exist. That would be much less cliche at this point.

Tim Burton has moved off of Maleficent, the Disney fantasy that would have teamed him with Angelina Jolie.

Maleficent is Disney’s live-action take on Sleeping Beauty, telling the fairy tale from the point of view of the evil witch who threatened to kill the princess. Disney years ago put a name to the witch, who had gone anonymous in the various tellings. Since then, the green-skinned queen of evil who morphs into a dragon has become one of the most popular Disney villains of all time.

Burton was only loosely attached to the project but his involvement was significant enough that last year the studio hired Burton's Alice in Wonderland collaborator Linda Woolverton, who also wrote Disney’s The Lion King, to pen the script. The project is being developed as a starring vehicle for Jolie.

Disney is not about to put Maleficent into a suspended-animation sleep. The studio is now on the hunt for a new director. One of the names that has surfaced in the early search is David Yates, who helmed the past four Harry Potter movies.

And Burton hasn’t left Disney. He's currently working on the feature-length stop-motion version of his 1984 short Frankenweenie. The movie is due for release on Oct. 5, 2012.

After seeing Burton's Alice in Wonderland I think this may be for the best after all.

I love David Yates, but he's more drawn towards psychological character drama than anything else. The Maleficent script would have to REALLY dig deep into what makes her tick in order to get his attention, and after what Woolverton gave us with Alice, I don't think we'll be getting that.

Guillermo del Toro would be a great choice, but he seems tied up with seemingly dozens of projects. I think Terry Gilliam would be interesting as would Alfonso Cuaron.

Guillermo del Toro would be an awesome director but they may fear he'll make it too dark. I don't want Angelina Jolie for Maleficent. I would prefer Tilda Swinton, Cate Blanchett or Michelle Phiffer for the role.

Or better yet Miranda Richardson. She has the kind of voice and has that cold beauty to her. Heck. She should have voiced Maleficent in the Kingdom Hearts games. (Well, they got Christopher Lee and Billy Zane doing them, so why not?)

Or better yet Miranda Richardson. She has the kind of voice and has that cold beauty to her. Heck. She should have voiced Maleficent in the Kingdom Hearts games. (Well, they got Christopher Lee and Billy Zane doing them, so why not?)

She would be good as well. She played a very icy Queen of Hearts in an adaption of Alice with Whoopi Goldburg as the CHeshire Cat and the Evil Queen in a made for TV version of Snow White with Kristin Kruek as Snow.

Since dropping out of Fox’s The Wolverine, director Darren Aronofsky has been linked to a number of projects. Everyone wants to know what he’ll choose as his follow up to the smashing success that was Black Swan. Earlier this month, it was reported that he was eyeing the sci-fi flick Human Nature with George Clooney attached to star. Now, Badass Digest reports that the director is being courted for two other high-profile projects: Disney wants him to helm Maleficent and Warner Bros. is courting the director for Moses. Maleficent just recently lost its director, as Tim Burton bowed out a few days ago, but David Yates has been mentioned as a possible replacement.

Since dropping out of Fox’s The Wolverine, director Darren Aronofsky has been linked to a number of projects. Everyone wants to know what he’ll choose as his follow up to the smashing success that was Black Swan. Earlier this month, it was reported that he was eyeing the sci-fi flick Human Nature with George Clooney attached to star. Now, Badass Digest reports that the director is being courted for two other high-profile projects: Disney wants him to helm Maleficent and Warner Bros. is courting the director for Moses.

Maleficent just recently lost its director, as Tim Burton bowed out a few days ago, but David Yates has been mentioned as a possible replacement.

Did I read that correctly? Burton has left "Tim Burtons: Maleficent?" ...

It's not like "Maleficent" was some pet project of his. Disney wanted to make a movie capitalizing on Maleficent's popularity (and to some extent, probably the popularity of "Wicked") and approached Tim Burton to helm it. I don't blame him for leaving. I'm still not convinced this is needed in any way, and I'm especially not convinced that Angelina Jolie should play Maleficent. I can't stand her.

_________________"Ta ta ta taaaa! Look at me... I'm a snowman! I'm gonna go stand on someone's lawn if I don't get something to do around here pretty soon!"

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 2 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum